J.S., a minor, and his parents H.S. and I.S. appealed the July
23, 1999 decision of the Court of Common Pleas of Northampton
County in which the court agreed with the decision of the Bethlehem
Area School District to permanently expel J.S. from its schools.

In May of 1998, J.S. was in the eighth grade at Nitschmann
Middle School, which is located within the School District. Sometime
prior to May, J.S. created a website on his home computer on his
own time. The website, "Teacher Sux," consisted of several
web pages that made derogatory and threatening comments about
J.S.'s algebra teacher, Mrs. Fulmer, and derogatory comments about
Nitschmann Principal, Mr. Kartsotis. On or about July 30, 1998,
the school district sent a letter stating its intent to suspend
J.S. for a period of three days, which alleged that violations
of district policy through three Level III offenses: threat to
a teacher, harassment of a teacher and principal and, disrespect
to a teacher and principal. After a hearing on the suspension,
the district decided to extend the suspension to ten days and
began expulsion proceedings against J.S. Based upon its findings,
the school board voted to permanently expel J.S. from its schools.
J.S. and his parents appealed the board's determination to trial
court, which affirmed.

On appeal to the Commonwealth Court, J.S. argued that his constitutional
rights were violated, the school district committed errors of
law and, the school district's findings of fact are not supported
by substantial evidence.

Decision of the Court

On July 14, 2000, The Commonwealth Court, No. 2259 C.D. 1999
affirmed the decision of the Court of Common Pleas of Northampton
County.

Basis of the Decision

The Commonwealth Court stated that: (1) the expulsion did not
violate the First Amendment free speech guarantee; (2) the student
was not entitled to a three-month continuance, until Thanksgiving
break, to attend expulsion proceeding; (3) the expulsion did not
violate equal protection; (4) the student had no expectation of
privacy in his website; and (5) the evidence supported decision
to expel student.

In reaching its decision the Commonwealth Court based its decision
on a number of court cases and references to the school code to
support its affirmation of the Court of Common Pleas of Northampton
County. In dealing with the issue of the student's claim that
his constitutional right of free speech had been violated, the
Commonwealth Court made reference to a number of cases dealing
with students and their right to free speech. Tinker v. Des
Moines Indep. Community Sch. Dist.; Bethel Sch. Dist. No. 403
v. Fraser; Donovan v. Ritchie; Fenton v. Stear; Beussink By and
Through Beussink v. Woodland R-IV Sch. District. All of these
cases illustrate that the courts have allowed school officials
to discipline students for conduct occurring off school premises
where it is established that the conduct materially and substantially
interferes with the educational process. The Commonwealth Court
agreed with the lower court when it ruled that student's website
did have a substantial impact on the school community and that
the trail court determined correctly that the school district
did not violate the student's rights under the First Amendment.
Furthermore the suspension and expulsion hearings that were conducted
by the school district properly followed 22 PaCode 12.8(b)(1)(i-ix)
in that J.S. was afforded all due process requirements in regards
to his formal hearing. Also the court found that the student could
have no expectation of privacy once his website was posted on
the World Wide Web. The Court citing United States v. Charbonneau
in support of that ruling.